Forensic team to testify in Koh Tao murder trial

[fireplay]

This is how i thought it is supposed to work....you submit evidence...and reports....and everybody gets a copy or a look or any opportunity to examine...
The full details of the Norfolk report were not disclosed verbally in court, although it was handed to the prosecution and the judge, and Mr Hall said the differences were significant.
http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/thai_murder_trial_told_of_autopsy_discrepancies_in_reports_relating_to_hannah_witheridge_1_4245105
Pony up prosecution .... well looks like you don't have to it is the last day isn't.
<deleted> holes

[Fat Haggis]

I'm not sure it is solely the embalming that would have destroyed any possible crucial evidence, I believe there's another process that "cleans" the body that also destroys tissue matter and DNA such as semen.

The point this is turning to here is that the RTP investigation and autopsy results support their investigation and there's now no way to disprove this, due to the process and missing/missplaced or whatever, whilst the UK Coroners report is refuting the Thai results by stating there's conflicting accounts, no evidence of rape.

AleG is now going on about Lesions, and the lack of, and is once again calling the findings of a Government official suspect....why?

I'm sorry but this is NOT someone who is simply interested in the truth, you simply do not go to these lengths of dismissing expert opinions when you're a simple Joe Bloggs off the street. Every single locked thread and banning has all had a single common denominator, it do any take much to know who, it's this that I just don't get.

Every single open minded person here has at one stage come into conflict with This member, he makes outlandish claims, I don't want this thread locked anymore than anyone else who has been keeping tabs on this, but it seems pretty obvious there is a concerted effort to get these threads closed down, effectively cutting off the flow of information. Why is this allowed to constantly happen?

What does this poster know, that despite the prosecution being ripped to shreds, and the conduct of the investigation and those who carried it out, he has not once thought " I have my doubts ?"

I had my doubts about the B2 early on, but I know about Koh Taos more shady side, and the shady people there, and the more press releases the RTP put out it convinced me then that a travesty of justice was unfolding and that lies and spin on the RTP were spiralling out of their own control, I had a very open mind. Not now.

This is a trial they thought would never happen, and like many other high profile incidents it would disappear, for all the sceptics here who doubt the RTPs case was solid, add several thousand average Thais who have followed this on various social media platforms.

[fireplay]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

The argument seems to be that the system is biased against Burmese people therefore these men are innocent. It's not a conclusion that follows the premise, so let's see what the judge decides.

I am curious if the judge decides a not guilty verdict....will you actually do an about face and say whoops I guess I was wrong. Or just continue on and say the judge is a part of some conspiracy?

[fab99]

I'm not sure it is solely the embalming that would have destroyed any possible crucial evidence, I believe there's another process that "cleans" the body that also destroys tissue matter and DNA such as semen.

The point this is turning to here is that the RTP investigation and autopsy results support their investigation and there's now no way to disprove this, due to the process and missing/missplaced or whatever, whilst the UK Coroners report is refuting the Thai results by stating there's conflicting accounts, no evidence of rape.

AleG is now going on about Lesions, and the lack of, and is once again calling the findings of a Government official suspect....why?

I'm sorry but this is NOT someone who is simply interested in the truth, you simply do not go to these lengths of dismissing expert opinions when you're a simple Joe Bloggs off the street. Every single locked thread and banning has all had a single common denominator, it do any take much to know who, it's this that I just don't get.

Every single open minded person here has at one stage come into conflict with This member, he makes outlandish claims, I don't want this thread locked anymore than anyone else who has been keeping tabs on this, but it seems pretty obvious there is a concerted effort to get these threads closed down, effectively cutting off the flow of information. Why is this allowed to constantly happen?

What does this poster know, that despite the prosecution being ripped to shreds, and the conduct of the investigation and those who carried it out, he has not once thought " I have my doubts ?"

I had my doubts about the B2 early on, but I know about Koh Taos more shady side, and the shady people there, and the more press releases the RTP put out it convinced me then that a travesty of justice was unfolding and that lies and spin on the RTP were spiralling out of their own control, I had a very open mind. Not now.

This is a trial they thought would never happen, and like many other high profile incidents it would disappear, for all the sceptics here who doubt the RTPs case was solid, add several thousand average Thais who have followed this on various social media platforms.

Very well said and it is probably the way most of us here feel.

Considering everything we have seen in this trial, it is close to impossible to at least not have a doubt about the B2 guiltiness, and I don't need to remind they are facing the death penalty, so a doubt is all that is needed to release them, or at least IT SHOULD, that is what is called justice...

Let's do everything we can to avoid the thread being closed again, share information and just ignore those who have different agenda, don't react or just react with facts to contradict their mistakes or spins efficiently.

Try to add value...

[Fat Haggis]

There is a very big difference in having an opinion that differed from others and having an agenda, you can change opinions as facts are presented agendas well....

[AleG]

The argument seems to be that the system is biased against Burmese people therefore these men are innocent. It's not a conclusion that follows the premise, so let's see what the judge decides.

I am curious if the judge decides a not guilty verdict....will you actually do an about face and say whoops I guess I was wrong. Or just continue on and say the judge is a part of some conspiracy?

I have never resorted to the facile and self serving arguments of conspiracies, so no.

The judge will make a decision based on all the evidence presented by both sides, not just the one being very forcefully promoted here by people that have developed an emotional need to see the defendants set free.

The judge will have to present a summary of what did he based his decision on and that will be available for study, furthermore the trial (empty protestations to the contrary) has been carried in a fair manner towards the defendants, the judge has repeatedly accommodated various requests by the defense.

So unless there is something grossly out of order in the judges reasoning I don't have a problem with accepting a verdict either way.

[Basil B]

Very strange nothing is mentioned of all the stab wounds to David's neck, throat, arm and the defensive wounds to his hands. Is this something that the defense wanted to bring up when it got the photos from the prosecution. Has the focus only been on Hannah's autopsy?

The focus is on that because the defense wants to cast doubt on the rape, because the UK autopsy didn't reveal rape related lesions. The Thai report doesn't mention lesions, only mentions evidence of rape and specifies semen traces, which are of course evidence of rape.

Semen traces are not evidence of rape.

you beat me to that...

Also has it also been established B&C are the B2?

[AleG]

Do you still not get it?

Stop the personal attacks against other posters, just because they have different opinions than you or your group.

How many times the mods have to remind you of that?

There are many silent readers of this threads that want to hear about facts and not your constant bickering and same old theories over hundreds of pages.

I find it ironic, to put it very mildly, that people that on one hand demand fairness and justice for the defendants have no need for either concept in dealing with people holding views different to theirs.

[smedly]

Very strange nothing is mentioned of all the stab wounds to David's neck, throat, arm and the defensive wounds to his hands. Is this something that the defense wanted to bring up when it got the photos from the prosecution. Has the focus only been on Hannah's autopsy?

The focus is on that because the defense wants to cast doubt on the rape, because the UK autopsy didn't reveal rape related lesions. The Thai report doesn't mention lesions, only mentions evidence of rape and specifies semen traces, which are of course evidence of rape.

Semen traces are not evidence of rape.

the Thai report is in most peoples opinions on here - was fabricated to provide a motive and cannot be trusted, so there is no point in constantly making reference to it on these threads/discussions - nobody believes any of it, the UK report says no evidence of rape - that will include no evidence of semen, as far as I am concerned the whole rape allegation by Thai police and prosecutors is fabricated and they have yet to produce any samples to prove their claims which also enforces the argument that they don't and never existed, that means that the Thai version of events is totally fabricated and now there is no motive for these murders unless the investigation goes back to the AC bar and is properly investigated - the place were the victims were last seen alive and earlier reports indicated an altercation with a Thai man all of which was dropped when the original officer in charge of the investigation was suddenly transferred and silenced

All pretty obvious for anyone with the ability to think for themselves

[BritTim]

you beat me to that...

Also has it also been established B&C are the B2?

According to the prosecution, yes. To any rational person, even assuming the semen samples ever existed which is quite uncertain, the answer is no.

[mcm991]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

No - you are wrong. About everything.

Edited to change the tone of my post.

Edited September 25, 2015 by mcm991

[fab99]

Very strange nothing is mentioned of all the stab wounds to David's neck, throat, arm and the defensive wounds to his hands. Is this something that the defense wanted to bring up when it got the photos from the prosecution. Has the focus only been on Hannah's autopsy?

The focus is on that because the defense wants to cast doubt on the rape, because the UK autopsy didn't reveal rape related lesions. The Thai report doesn't mention lesions, only mentions evidence of rape and specifies semen traces, which are of course evidence of rape.

Semen traces are not evidence of rape.

you beat me to that...

Also has it also been established B&C are the B2?

and who is A? the third one they talked about at some point (you have to agree that if there is a B and a C, it is because there is also a A...

[BritTim]

and who is A? the third one they talked about at some point (you have to agree that if there is a B and a C, it is because there is also a A...

Originally, they were planning on three scapegoats, preferably large ones (really necessary for it to be credible they could overcome two big Westerners). Mr A was the third scapegoat that they were, in the end, unable to produce.

[fab99]

Do you still not get it?

Stop the personal attacks against other posters, just because they have different opinions than you or your group.

How many times the mods have to remind you of that?

There are many silent readers of this threads that want to hear about facts and not your constant bickering and same old theories over hundreds of pages.

I find it ironic, to put it very mildly, that people that on one hand demand fairness and justice for the defendants have no need for either concept in dealing with people holding views different to theirs.

Are those "people holding different views" also risking the death penaly like the B2 do?

Comparing the B2 treatment and persecution to your situation like you imply is quite far fetched...

[thailandchilli]

More human rights advocates concerns

Mark Farmaner ‏@MarkFarmaner 2h2 hours ago

As Koh Tao trial continues, Thai investigation exposed as farce, Did UK gov know this and do nothing? Did they tell the families?

[thailandchilli]

There's a huge difference between accepting others views and accepting others false facts that are clearly not true and need to be challenged

[BritTim]

There's a huge difference between accepting others views and accepting others false facts that are clearly not true and need to be challenged

100% agree. I would add a rider. Do not bother to contest false facts that are minor in nature. Squabbling about minutia just derails the thread and irritates mods.

[fab99]

and who is A? the third one they talked about at some point (you have to agree that if there is a B and a C, it is because there is also a A...

Originally, they were planning on three scapegoats, preferably large ones (really necessary for it to be credible they could overcome two big Westerners). Mr A was the third scapegoat that they were, in the end, unable to produce.

They were actually looking for suspects taller than the B2 (about 170cm) at first : Phuketnews

One of my main doubts in this case was that the B2 did it alone, they are far shorter than David and 2 vs 2 is not as easy to manage as 2 vs 1.

The element of surprise that was part of the RTP scenario was a possible explanation but there were signs that David put up a fight as he har defensive wounds and multiple wounds, not just a blow to the back of the head.

But now that we know (yes we do know...) that both the victims had their hands on the hoe, the element of surprise is trully gone so the attackers (the beasts) didn't have this advantage, they must have had another one, either weapons and/or numerical superiority...

[bamukloy]

and who is A? the third one they talked about at some point (you have to agree that if there is a B and a C, it is because there is also a A...

Originally, they were planning on three scapegoats, preferably large ones (really necessary for it to be credible they could overcome two big Westerners). Mr A was the third scapegoat that they were, in the end, unable to produce.

They were actually looking for suspects taller than the B2 (about 170cm) at first : Phuketnews

One of my main doubts in this case was that the B2 did it alone, they are far shorter than David and 2 vs 2 is not as easy to manage as 2 vs 1.

The element of surprise that was part of the RTP scenario was a possible explanation but there were signs that David put up a fight as he har defensive wounds and multiple wounds, not just a blow to the back of the head.

But now that we know (yes we do know...) that both the victims had their hands on the hoe, the element of surprise is trully gone so the attackers (the beasts) didn't have this advantage, they must have had another one, either weapons and/or numerical superiority...

I think whatever impliment caused the injury to Davids throat/jaw would have been enough.

what of this scenario..David interrupts three men harrassing Hannah and positions himself between her and them. A fight ensues with the three of them surrounding him. While the 3 are scuffling with David, Hannah looks for something nearby to defend themselves. The Hoe.

She swings at one and gets them away from David for a brief moment, long enough to give David the hoe, which he threatens them with.

But at some time during the scuffle one of them came from behind and inflicted the neck wound on David.

David In shock and bleeding badly it wouldnt be hard for the biggest one to tackle him from behind and the other two to come in, take the hoe...

[CharlieH]

It has been posted several times in this thread, I will now make it clear again.

Debate /discuss the TOPIC not individual members nor make personal accusations. ANY such post will be removed and the member responsible SUSPENDED.

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.

8) You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages, vulgarities, obscenities or profanities.

9) You will not post inflammatory messages on the forum, or attempt to disrupt discussions to upset its participants, or trolling. Trolling can be defined as the act of purposefully antagonizing other people on the internet by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

[BritTim]

I think whatever impliment caused the injury to Davids throat/jaw would have been enough.

what of this scenario..David interrupts three men harrassing Hannah and positions himself between her and them. A fight ensues with the three of them surrounding him. While the 3 are scuffling with David, Hannah looks for something nearby to defend themselves. The Hoe.

She swings at one and gets them away from David for a brief moment, long enough to give David the hoe, which he threatens them with.

But at some time during the scuffle one of them came from behind and inflicted the neck wound on David.

David In shock and bleeding badly it wouldnt be hard for the biggest one to tackle him from behind and the other two to come in, take the hoe...

Possibly. The number of assailants could have been more than three, actually.

[AleG]

and who is A? the third one they talked about at some point (you have to agree that if there is a B and a C, it is because there is also a A...

Originally, they were planning on three scapegoats, preferably large ones (really necessary for it to be credible they could overcome two big Westerners). Mr A was the third scapegoat that they were, in the end, unable to produce.

The police originally arrested three men, the third one was let go because there was no evidence to implicate him with the murders. So the idea the they were simply out to get anyone and make them fit into a predetermined scenario is not just not supported by any facts, the facts contradict it.

Same as the theory that there was never any DNA evidence to begin with, a few days after the murders they announced there were two sets of DNA from Asian males, then they used that to test and clear out suspects for the next three weeks.

The idea that they would simply make everything up is absurd, what's the scenario? They just pretend that they have DNA evidence, go around making a fool of themselves by pointing fingers at this suspect and that suspect, backpedaling and then, after over three weeks finally bring the plan to fruition by this time pointing the finger at the men now on trial all that charade for the purpose of... what exactly?

Besides that people should make up their minds already, one year of hearing how the original police team was the real deal until they were pushed aside to frame up some innocent people, and now it was the original team that fabricated all the evidence in the first place? Which one is it?

[BritTim]

and who is A? the third one they talked about at some point (you have to agree that if there is a B and a C, it is because there is also a A...

Originally, they were planning on three scapegoats, preferably large ones (really necessary for it to be credible they could overcome two big Westerners). Mr A was the third scapegoat that they were, in the end, unable to produce.

The police originally arrested three men, the third one was let go because there was no evidence to implicate him with the murders. So the idea the they were simply out to get anyone and make them fit into a predetermined scenario is not just not supported by any facts, the facts contradict it.

Same as the theory that there was never any DNA evidence to begin with, a few days after the murders they announced there were two sets of DNA from Asian males, then they used that to test and clear out suspects for the next three weeks.

The idea that they would simply make everything up is absurd, what's the scenario? They just pretend that they have DNA evidence, go around making a fool of themselves by pointing fingers at this suspect and that suspect, backpedaling and then, after over three weeks finally bring the plan to fruition by this time pointing the finger at the men now on trial all that charade for the purpose of... what exactly?

Besides that people should make up their minds already, one year of hearing how the original police team was the real deal until they were pushed aside to frame up some innocent people, and now it was the original team that fabricated all the evidence in the first place? Which one is it?

Primarily the local police, with the connivance of elements of both the teams of senior investigators.

[DM07]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

The argument seems to be that the system is biased against Burmese people therefore these men are innocent. It's not a conclusion that follows the premise, so let's see what the judge decides.

Who -in ...well ...ever- said that?

"The system is biased against Burmese people and all of the @#$%^&* so called "evidence" shows absolutely nothing, in terms of them being guilty, therefore these men are innocent"...if anything, this would be, what is being said!

RTP: Hannah was raped

Fact: no, she very well wasn't! At least there is no evidence supporting this, unless "we say so" is deemed evidence nowadays!

RTP: there was the semen of one of the B2 inside of the victims vagina...

Fact: well, since she wasn't raped, there are only 2 possibilities: a) she had sex with one of the B2 consentually or b ) very much more likely, there was no semen! Why is this more likely? Because all the evidence "we" have is the word of a bunch of corrupt, well known organisation of liars, who kept no chain of custody and have also "used up" all the DNA- carriers (cig- butts, condom etc)!

RTP: the hoe was the only murder- weapon

Fact: so how come, there is DNA of the victims on it, indicating, they were both holding it for some time?

Why is there no DNA of the any of the B2 on it, who allegedly slashed 2 people to death with it?

Because, before they went to a peaceful slumber in their quarter, they took the time to -very careful and selectively- wipe away their DNA- traces?

Jeeeezas!

RTP: ...but they confessed and did the reinactment!

Fact: most likely they were tortured into confessing and even Ray Charles could see, that the reinactment was a Muppet- show!

This and also the fact that CCTV was deemed "unimportant" (who decides that? The all mighty RTP?) and not checked, clothes went missing, pictures could not be filed and and and....makes this case a total mess.

The fact that you can not see that or -more likely- refuse to see this, because of reasons only clear to yourself, makes me doubt humankind!

[thailandchilli]

Its well documented that arrests had to happen as the world was watching, when the RTP could not or would not find the real perps they then went for the current accused.

[stephenterry]

and who is A? the third one they talked about at some point (you have to agree that if there is a B and a C, it is because there is also a A...

Originally, they were planning on three scapegoats, preferably large ones (really necessary for it to be credible they could overcome two big Westerners). Mr A was the third scapegoat that they were, in the end, unable to produce.

They were actually looking for suspects taller than the B2 (about 170cm) at first : Phuketnews

One of my main doubts in this case was that the B2 did it alone, they are far shorter than David and 2 vs 2 is not as easy to manage as 2 vs 1.

The element of surprise that was part of the RTP scenario was a possible explanation but there were signs that David put up a fight as he har defensive wounds and multiple wounds, not just a blow to the back of the head.

But now that we know (yes we do know...) that both the victims had their hands on the hoe, the element of surprise is trully gone so the attackers (the beasts) didn't have this advantage, they must have had another one, either weapons and/or numerical superiority...

Quite right. And not a difficult deduction from what we've heard. What I find mind-boggling is posters still think the B2 were involved - no doubt because they're in the dock instead of the real perps. The RTP put them there, so they must be guilty syndrome. It's like two small round pins in a square hole - they'll go in, but won't fit.

[Aj Mick]

So to summarize the defense has absolutely no tangible objection to challenge the indictment contrary to what it announced a few days ago.

Points of dispute sembent be limited to the lawfulness of dna control and reproach the police using a forceful methods.

The DNA match found in the body of Hannah Witheridge with 2 Burmese is not contested.

The additional time requested by the defense is indisputable proof that it has nothing tangible to show.

And so, in the absence of new elements the B that some call unwisely "two children" are the perpetrators of the rape and murder particularly abject.

The DNA match found in the body of Hanna Witheridge with the 2 Burmese is not able to be contested……..

….. Because it was "used up", or it never even existed in the first place. And if it did exist, there is no chain of custody of the said evidence. It comes down to the RTP effectively saying, "We're police officers; trust us."

Have we any reason to trust them, when they they are not able to produce the evidence to back up what they state?

Edited September 25, 2015 by Aj Mick

[thailandchilli]

and who is A? the third one they talked about at some point (you have to agree that if there is a B and a C, it is because there is also a A...

Originally, they were planning on three scapegoats, preferably large ones (really necessary for it to be credible they could overcome two big Westerners). Mr A was the third scapegoat that they were, in the end, unable to produce.

The police originally arrested three men, the third one was let go because there was no evidence to implicate him with the murders. So the idea the they were simply out to get anyone and make them fit into a predetermined scenario is not just not supported by any facts, the facts contradict it.

Same as the theory that there was never any DNA evidence to begin with, a few days after the murders they announced there were two sets of DNA from Asian males, then they used that to test and clear out suspects for the next three weeks.

The idea that they would simply make everything up is absurd, what's the scenario? They just pretend that they have DNA evidence, go around making a fool of themselves by pointing fingers at this suspect and that suspect, backpedaling and then, after over three weeks finally bring the plan to fruition by this time pointing the finger at the men now on trial all that charade for the purpose of... what exactly?

Besides that people should make up their minds already, one year of hearing how the original police team was the real deal until they were pushed aside to frame up some innocent people, and now it was the original team that fabricated all the evidence in the first place? Which one is it?

Primarily the local police, with the connivance of elements of both the teams of senior investigators.

The third suspect at the time when it was the B3 was not charged because he managed to get through the torture he suffered at the hands of the RTP. So without that confession it would have been harder to also pin false DNA on him

Janjira Janpeau said Mao Mao told her he had also been beaten by police officers on Koh Tao during three days of detention and interrogation, and that one of the defendants, Zaw Lin, had shown him a wound on his chest after he allegedly confessed to the killings. http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/news/hannah_witheridge_s_family_return_to_thailand_for_closing_days_of_trial_following_breach_of_legal_rights_claim_1_4245303

[BritTim]

The third suspect at the time when it was the B3 was not charged because he managed to get through the torture he suffered at the hands of the RTP. So without that confession it would have been harder to also pin false DNA on him

Janjira Janpeau said Mao Mao told her he had also been beaten by police officers on Koh Tao during three days of detention and interrogation, and that one of the defendants, Zaw Lin, had shown him a wound on his chest after he allegedly confessed to the killings. http://www.greatyarmouthmercury.co.uk/news/hannah_witheridge_s_family_return_to_thailand_for_closing_days_of_trial_following_breach_of_legal_rights_claim_1_4245303

I think his resistance to the torture was part of it. A bigger reason was that he had an alibi that could probably have been validated after a forced confession that was retracted later. The RTP realized that a totally discredited forced confession from B3 would pretty much eliminate the confessions of B1 and B2 from consideration.

[stephenterry]

Its well documented that arrests had to happen as the world was watching, when the RTP could not or would not find the real perps they then went for the current accused.

Pressure from above to maintain Thailand's image as a safe tourist country - it was imperative that the 'best police in the world' according to police chief Somyot (who is totally delusional) find and arrest suspects. Who are the easiest targets? No surprise that two migrant workers were hand-picked to take the hit.

Once the snowball started rolling it was impossible to stop it. They could at least have made a half decent job in framing the accused - as of now most people hold them in utter contempt.